In this movie, see http://www.paramount.com/flight/ for review, Denzel Washington, while under the influence, as the pilot of a plane supposedly saves 100 lives by making an impossible landing. Yet, the movie ends with the "book being thrown at him" because he was under the influence.
One might well assume from the movie that he made the impossible landing because he was under the influence.
Is our system consistent about punishment based on:
- The action without regard to consequences?
Primarily the consequences?
But, is this real world assumption really true that most (all) addicts re a crash to happen or are they just making killing themselves slowly?
Even if true, would not it make more sense to just force treatment for first offense rather that punish?
But back to the movie ... in the real world would a first offender (first time caught in Denzels case) receive significant punishment if there were no consequences, i.e., in his case no crash, no in flight incidents?